Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
No Sympathy for This Devil
Turning a short story into a feature-length movie can be even trickier than adapting a novel. Unlike the novel, the short story is a compact piece of writing with all its elements compressed and, as Edgar Allan Poe defined it, designed to create a single impression. Short stories tend to have a limited number of characters, their concise plots telescoped into a few brief scenes, sometimes as few as one or two scenes. So the task of adapting a short story for the screen is largely one of expansion, of elaborating on what's already there by adding more details and often entirely new elements to create a fuller and more complex plot.One common way of doing this is to use the original story as a framing device and invent an entirely new middle explaining how the situation described in the story came about. This approach was especially popular in the 1940s, with that decade's fondness for flashback plots that begin by showing the conclusion of the movie first. It was used in The Killers (1946), a brilliant film noir based on the story by Hemingway, and in My Foolish Heart (1949), based on J. D. Salinger's story "Uncle Wiggily in Connecticut," the only one of his works ever filmed. No wonder Salinger hated the movie, since 90% of it was the creation of the screenwriter, who turned Salinger's bleak story of post-World War II suburban frustration and alcoholism into a sentimental wartime romance with a happy ending.
The 1941 film version of Stephen Vincent Benét's O. Henry Prize-winning short story "The Devil and Daniel Webster" (originally released under the title All That Money Can Buy but now generally referred to by the story's title) eschewed the flashback approach and stuck with the chronological structure of the story. Set in the 1840s, it is about Jabez Stone, an unlucky New Hampshire farmer who in a moment of exasperation impulsively blurts out that his misfortunes are "enough to make a man want to sell his soul to the devil . . . for two cents." When a mysterious stranger appears and offers to take him up on this offer, Jabez signs a "contract" in blood and sees his bad luck turn to good. When the contract comes due in seven years, Stone panics and turns to the renowned orator and statesman Daniel Webster for help.
The first half of Benét's story is quite sketchy, almost a summary of events that happen over those seven years. The second half is one long, fully developed scene of Daniel Webster demanding a jury trial for Stone and getting it. The movie kept this basic plot, using the diabolical trial as the dramatic concluding sequence. To get a 107-minute movie from a story little more than ten pages long, the screenwriter, Dan Totheroh, did the conventional thing—to embellish the plot with details of his own creation. The plot he devised remained faithful to the spirit of the story but amplified its nature and focus in significant ways and gave German-trained director William Dieterle the opportunity to fully exercise his considerable visual storytelling skills.
The movie emphasizes the essential nature of farm life: how the success or failure of a farmer is closely connected to the success or failure of his farm and so often determined by natural forces beyond his control. When the film opens, Jabez Stone's farm is mortgaged to a greedy money lender named Miser Stevens, and the mortgage payment is due. Stone, who doesn't have the money to make the payment, intends to use products from the farm to barter for an extension. But everything goes wrong for him. A prize piglet he plans to offer to Miser Stevens breaks its leg; he drops a sack of grain seed in the mud and it splits, spilling the seed and ruining it.
It is obvious that the economic problems of farmers and their helplessness in the face of bankers and mortgages have been added to the plot to make it more timely. When the movie was released in 1941, the country was just coming out of the Great Depression. This period in American history had begun not much more than a decade earlier with widespread agrarian economic disaster caused by crop failure and the massive amount of debt owed by farmers to lenders and lending institutions. Audiences of the time would have been well aware of this recent situation, and the realization that these are the very problems that drive Jabez to sell his soul to the devil must have resonated powerfully with them.
After Stone's pact with the devil, which occurs in April, he has enough money to pay off his entire mortgage and buy seed for a new crop. Stone's good fortune is signaled by a striking montage of springtime fertility reminiscent of those idealized views of collective farms coming out of Russia in the 1920s and 30s. In rapid succession we see simple shots of wheat being sown, growing, maturing, and ripening, along with shots of farm animals with their young—a group of chicks following a hen, newborn piglets suckling. And his young wife Mary (Anne Shirley), a sweet-natured but plain-looking and modest woman, announces that she is pregnant with their first child.
While Stone seems to have extraordinarily good luck, his neighbors seem to have extraordinarily bad luck. A freak storm late in the growing season wipes out their crops but leaves his fields untouched. So abundant is his crop that he hires his neighbors to harvest it. The sense of power produced by this ostensible act of charity initiates a marked change in Jabez Stone's personality. He becomes arrogant and greedy. He exploits his neighbors by lending them money at crippling rates of interest. He refuses to join the new Grange they have founded to pressure Congress into extending bankruptcy laws to farmers to protect them from predatory lenders like Miser Stevens and now Jabez Stone himself. He becomes a shallow social climber who goes fox hunting like a landed English aristocrat. He builds an ostentatious new mansion and moves into it without his neglected wife and disgusted mother (Jane Darwell), who prefer to stay on at the family's simple little farmhouse.
Not only does Stone lose his humanity, but he also loses his religion. Incidents added to the plot by Totheroh show him breaking, either directly or indirectly, nearly every one of the ten commandments of his Protestant faith. The God he now worships is money, which at this time was not the paper bills of today but minted gold coins (in a way, graven images). An extremely attractive and openly erotic woman named Belle (Simone Simon), clearly an emissary of the devil, mysteriously shows up as nursemaid to Stone's newborn son, and it is obvious that she quickly becomes his mistress. Jabez stops going to church, preferring to stay at home on Sunday with Belle playing cards and gambling with his dissolute cronies. He covets his neighbors' land and soon acquires it, symbolically stealing it through his money-lending. His formerly respectful attitude toward his mother becomes rudeness and ridicule of her religious faith. She is especially offended by his repeated use of the oath "Consarn it," an obvious euphemism for "Goddam it." (Neither Belle nor the mother appears in the story.)
But even with all these potent thematic elements, it is Walter Huston as the devil who dominates the movie. In Benét's story he is described only as a "soft-spoken, dark-dressed" man who "smiled with his teeth." Huston takes this terse description and runs with it, creating an innocuous-looking character neatly dressed in a dark suit and tweed hat, always smiling, always speaking in a gentle voice, but somehow exuding quiet menace. He is less a threatening demon than a mischievous leprechaun secretly amused by his invisible power over humans, confident that his inducements are too tempting for most humans to resist. His role, in truth a supporting one (even though he gets top billing and received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for best actor), is still the most prominent one in the movie from the sheer force of his presence. He regularly visits Jabez and frequently shows up in the background, nodding and smiling merrily in crowd scenes and scratching his bearded chin. (The first time he appears, he introduces himself as Dan Scratch.)
Huston is also prominently featured in the movie's most visually exciting sequences. When Jabez, standing in his barn, makes that crack about selling his soul to the devil for two cents, he opens his hand and finds himself holding two coins. At that moment the wall of the barn seems to open up and becomes flooded with brilliant light. Slowly the form of a well-dressed man scratching his chin emerges from the light, walks up to Jabez, introduces himself, and holds out a business card, which promptly bursts into flames in his hand. It is Huston. Later in the year at the harvest dance, he shows up as the grimacing fiddler, manically sawing away at his instrument faster and faster while Jabez and Belle whirl in a frenzied dance and in the house Mary Stone is delivering her child. (At this point I should mention Bernard Herrmann's Oscar-winning score which, like Joseph August's equally brilliant lighting and photography and Robert Wise's editing, contributes immeasurably to the picture.)Huston also turns up when Jabez invites the whole town to a housewarming party at his gaudy new mansion. Nobody else comes except Mary, who is immediately turned away by Belle. "You're in my house," Belle says to her. When Jabez walks to the window to look for people arriving, he sees an eerily silent horde of the damned from hell lurking outside. As he walks away from the window, he turns around to find the damned crowding around the lavish buffet laid out in the dining room and the devil sitting in a chair by the fireplace.
Mr. Scratch has come to remind Jabez that the seven years of his contract are nearly up. As he and Jabez sit across from each other, a large moth flutters from the devil's pocket and lands on Jabez. "Neighbor Stone, help me!" a tiny voice pleads. It is the voice of Miser Stevens. Huston explains that he was another client and that the moth is his soul. This incident has been transposed from early in Benét's story and is a clear allusion to the attraction of moths to flame. In fact, fire is a recurring motif in the movie, from the devil's calling card, to the indoor scenes that take place before open fireplaces, to the destruction by fire of the grand mansion at the end of the movie. Huston reaches out, scoops up the moth, and wraps it in a handkerchief. When Jabez begs for an extension of his contract, Huston says he might consider it . . . if Jabez will deliver him the soul of his young son. (Is this a parallel to the Biblical story of Abraham and Isaac, but intended to test Jabez's allegiance to the devil?) Killing is just about the only commandment Jabez has not yet broken, but this suggestion is too much even for him.
And Huston shares the spotlight in that famous trial sequence when Daniel Webster (Edward Arnold) argues for Jabez Stone before a "jury of the damned" chosen by the devil. Webster's chief argument is that as an American, Jabez Stone is entitled to freedom, and that for the devil to claim him would be a violation of that freedom. This leads to the most stinging bit of dialogue in the movie, taken directly from the story and still relevant today. When Webster calls the devil a "foreign prince," the devil takes exception: "Who calls me a foreign prince?" he asks. "Well, I never heard of the dev—of your claiming American citizenship," says Daniel Webster. "And who with better right?" the devil replies. "When the first wrong was done to the first Indian, I was there. When the first slaver put out for the Congo, I stood on her deck. . . . I am merely an honest American."
As a studio product of the 1940s and with its strong element of patriotic Americana (although to be fair, this comes from the story and is actually downplayed for the film), the movie's outcome is never seriously in doubt. On its own, The Devil and Daniel Webster is a very entertaining movie, a narrative and visual treat that should please anyone interested in the best motion pictures of the American studio era. But for those interested in literature as well as film, and in the process of adapting literature for film, its interest is more than cinematic. The movie follows the structure of the story respectfully and yet finds ways to expand it to feature length that are equally respectful. Little that I have described, aside from the trial and a very few details, can be found in the story, yet the movie is wholly consistent with the spirit and intent of its source material. It is a true exemplar of the tricky craft of transforming a great short story into an outstanding movie.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Jacques Tati: The Master of French Film Comedy, Part 2
Jacques Tati was hardly a prolific filmmaker. In the twenty-four years between 1947 and 1971, he made only five feature-length movies. The fact that so much time elapsed between films suggests the extreme amount of thought and preparation that went into the conception, filming, and post-production of each of those works.
Tati's second movie, Monsieur Hulot's Holiday (1953), set a pattern that Tati would pretty much follow for the rest of his career. It takes up where his previous film left off (not in the narrative sense, but in cinematic terms) and then makes significant advances in many areas. Tati seemed never to want to repeat himself but always to move forward with his next movie, to take what he had already done and build on it to create something new and more ambitious. Monsieur Hulot's Holiday still has the rather loose structure of Tati's first movie, Jour de Fête (1949), consisting of a series of set pieces not strongly linked by a linear or chronological plot. The title character goes on vacation at the seaside in Brittany, becomes involved in a series of comical misadventures, and at the end returns home. Sounds simple, doesn't it? Yet so fertile was Tati's imagination that within this episodic theme-and-variations structure, he managed to create a movie that is fondly remembered and even loved by nearly everyone who has seen it.
The reasons for the movie's brilliance are two-fold. One is the impeccable conception and execution of each of the many brilliant gags in the movie, whether a brief sight gag or an elaborately detailed comedic set piece. These are done with the precision of a Buster Keaton or Charles Chaplin, and Tati's fusion of the physicality of Keaton and the whimsy of Chaplin is bound to remind the viewer of both of those comic geniuses. But in the absence of a strong narrative continuum, what really holds the movie together is the character of Monsieur Hulot, making his first appearance in this film. M. Hulot, who became Tati's alter ego and the main character of all his subsequent movies, is a unique creation who contains elements of Tati's idols, the trifecta of American silent comedian/filmmakers—Keaton, Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd. Like the characters those three greats tended to play, M. Hulot is an oddball whose individuality causes him to be the underdog or the outsider in every situation.The movie opens with the credits seen over shots of a peaceful, deserted beach, the only sounds those of waves breaking on the shore and mellow music playing on the soundtrack. Without warning, the scene shifts to one of pandemonium. It is August in France, and the entire country is going on vacation. In a train depot we hear loudly amplified crowd noises and see frazzled families desperately attempting to find the right train. Confused by the incomprehensible gibberish coming from the loudspeakers (it resembles the blathering noises of the dignitaries dedicating the monument at the beginning of City Lights), frenzied holiday-goers race from platform to platform.
Meanwhile on a country road we first see M. Hulot puttering along in his tiny, sputtering car as more affluent vacationers in their more powerful cars hurtle past him, leaving him in a cloud of dust. M. Hulot's ancient little car, backfiring like crazy, struggles to make it up a steep hill and comes to a dead stop before it reaches the top. Finally making it down the hill, he coasts at a leisurely pace through a quiet village the other cars have sped through, stopping for a dog sleeping in the middle of the road, and even taking time to pat its head before continuing on. This first introduction to M. Hulot succinctly tells us practically everything we need to know about him. In any competition, he will be last, for competition is not in his nature. Nor is haste or unkindness, even to dogs sleeping in the road. And unlike the other holiday-makers, he travels alone and apart from the crowd.
When M. Hulot arrives at his destination, the seaside Hôtel de la Plage, we get our first good look at him. Unlike the short Keaton, Chaplin, and Lloyd, M. Hulot is a tall, gangly man. He has a way of walking as distinctive as Chaplin's swaying, shuffling gait. M. Hulot walks using not just his feet and legs, but with his entire body, leaning forward and lurching ahead purposefully, bouncing on the soles of his feet with each step, at once both stiff and loose. In his dress, he is also as distinctive as his idols. Like Keaton with his pork pie hat and Chaplin with his bowler, M. Hulot wears a funny hat too. Lloyd always wears glasses; M. Hulot is seldom seen without his pipe. Chaplin's baggy clothes seem too large for such a small man; M. Hulot's clothes seem too small, the sleeves and hem of his jacket and the legs of his trousers far too short for such a large man, as though he has somehow outgrown them.
When M.Hulot walks into the lobby of the hotel to register, we get a preview of his future relationship to the staff and other guests. The lobby is filled with guests sitting and relaxing, reading novels or newspapers, sipping drinks, playing cards, listening to the hotel radio. As M. Hulot opens the door, a ferocious wind rises, and as he props the doors open, stashes his pipe in his mouth, and struggles to get two suitcases, a fish-landing net, and a tennis racquet into the hotel, the wind roars through the lobby, turning the peaceful scene into a maelstrom,
This incident creates a bad first impression from which he never recovers. The other guests, who already seem to have formed a cliquish sort of community, are united in their snobbish dislike and suspicion of the man. Even the hotel staff find him a nuisance, wondering what problem he will cause next and giving him constant dirty looks. Their watchfulness actually distracts them to the point that is causes them to do things like drop a fountain pen in an aquarium, for which, of course, they silently blame M. Hulot.
By the time he reaches the hotel, only a few minutes into the movie, the film's structure is set. The rest of the movie will consist of the comic scrapes M. Hulot gets into and the inventive means he uses not to get caught. Comparing his movies to Chaplin's, Tati once said that Chaplin's Little Tramp makes things happen, whereas things happen to M. Hulot. And he is indeed like the child who is always inadvertently getting into trouble: he may be technically responsible for the problems he causes, but he remains blameless because it is all either unintentional or the result of good intentions gone awry.
M. Hulot quickly becomes a benignly disruptive force on this little community, continually causing mischief and aggravation without meaning to. He accidentally launches a boat whose owner is painting it on the shore. He causes a shark scare on the beach (an incident that seems inspired by the boat gag in Keaton's The Balloonatic). He drives into a cemetery during a funeral, where his spare inner tube is mistaken for a funeral wreath, and to avoid embarrassing the mourners enters the receiving line and shakes hands with those attending. He kicks a man he thinks is spying on a young woman through a knothole in a changing cabin on the beach, only to find the man was really peering through the viewfinder of a tripod-mounted camera taking a picture of his family (a purely cinematic gag based on the two-dimensionality of the movie screen). He exasperates the hotel staff by leaving wet footprints in the lobby without ever being seen doing it. With one brief ill-timed push of a swiveling chair, he causes two tables of card players to believe that everyone else is cheating and to erupt into a heated fracas. His unforgettable and hilariously aggressive tennis serve defeats all who attempt to play against him: "Le tennis, c'est pas ça!" breathlessly exclaims one exhausted young opponent.
Tati links these incidents together with the periodic repetition of certain actions that essentially become unifying motifs. Two of the guests we first meet are a well-dressed elderly couple who apparently do little but take walks—she always leading, he following a few steps behind—and every few minutes we see them taking another leisurely stroll. M. Schmutz is a chubby, rather tyrannical businessman who, even though on vacation with his family, is summoned regularly to the telephone to confer with his company or his stockbroker. M. Hulot is repeatedly seen peering at the beach from the open skylight in the roof of his attic room in the hotel. The waiter rings the dining room bell for another meal. Several people have unfortunate encounters in a dark side room with a loud phonograph that is turned on by the light switch, always at the most inopportune time. M. Hulot repeatedly wakens the sleeping hotel in the middle of the night, and every time he does, we see lights in the windows of the darkened building coming on one by one.
One element Tati added to Monsieur Hulot's Holiday that wasn't in Jour de Fête is a girl, an element he kept in all his subsequent movies except Mon Oncle. The Girl was something always present in the films of the great American silent film comedians. Typically the hero's getting the girl was the motivation for his actions and provided the conclusion for the movie. But in Monsieur Hulot's Holiday, as in Tati's following movies, the girl is not so much a romantic object as a chaste ideal, a representation of tolerance and non-judgment and one of the few people who relate to M. Hulot and whom he can relate to in return.
Here the girl is called Martine (Nathalie Pascaud), and she is staying in a very picturesque traditional timbered house across from the hotel. As the most attractive young woman around, she receives a lot of attention from the young men, but it is in M. Hulot's company that she seems to feel most comfortable. She appears to be amused by his child-like enthusiasms, his imperviousness to the patronizing attitude of others, and his innocent ability to deflate pomposity and self-importance. During that memorable tennis game, only Martine, looking on from the side, is amused by M. Hulot's good-natured ability to exasperate all his opponents. She even allows him to walk her home afterward.
It is M. Hulot she allows to take her to the costume dance at the hotel, one of the most delightful sequences in the movie. What a comically odd couple they make. He looks absurd in his corny pirate's costume with a bandeau, eyepatch, and one gold hoop earring. She looks lovely in her diamond-patterned Harlequinesque party dress, high heels, and Harlequin mask. And the way he dances is indescribably unique, and indescribably funny.
One of the big advances of Monsieur Hulot's Holiday over Jour de Fête is Tati's ability to succinctly define minor characters in just a few visual strokes—their clothing, facial expressions, body language, and above all reaction to M. Hulot. Martine, the strolling couple, M. Schmutz, the vacationing Englishwoman who befriends M. Hulot, the other guests at the hotel, even the hotel staff are vividly limned in no time at all, so carefully does Tati select the few details about them we're shown.Another big advance over Jour de Fête is the refinement in Tati's use of sound. In Jour de Fête Tati was almost like a child so enamored of a new toy that he was quite unrestrained in his use of sound, at times saturating the soundtrack to the point that it threatened to overwhelm the images. In Monsieur Hulot's Holiday he takes a very different approach, one he would continue in later films. Here sound is used selectively and very deliberately. There is little dialogue, and what there is often occurs in the background; the primary means of telling the story is always visual. M. Hulot himself speaks only three times in the movie and even then utters little more than a single word. Tati once explained to an interviewer why he preferred to use dialogue so sparingly. He observed that because it's easier to be funny in one's own country using dialogue, humor based on speech tends to be national, whereas humor based on situation and movement tends to be international.
But it is Tati's use of non-spoken sounds that constitutes the most remarkable advance over Jour de Fête. The contrast between the beach and the train depot in that opening sequence, M. Hulot's car backfiring and sputtering, the phonograph suddenly blaring out the "Tiger Rag" at high volume, the frequent ringing of the dinner bell, the distinctive sound of M. Hulot's ping pong ball as he plays table tennis in the room next to the crowded but otherwise completely silent hotel lobby, the metallic "bong" the door to the dining room makes every time it is opened, even the sound of the waves breaking on the shore—all these noises are used to create specific atmospheric and comical effects. This targeted use of sound effects within silence is something Tati would continue to do with great effectiveness in the films made after Monsieur Hulot's Holiday.
The most brilliant use of sound and the most brilliant set piece in the whole movie takes place just before the end. The entire hotel decides to go on a group outing for their last day together, and M. Hulot is part of the carpool that will ferry the revelers to the picnic spot. Car trouble prevents him from arriving on time, delaying the group's departure and upsetting all their careful organization. Then on the way his car has a flat tire and while he is trying to fix it slips off the jack and rolls away, taking his two passengers with it, and leaving him stranded.
That evening he has still not returned to the hotel. In the middle of the night, still trying to find his way back to the hotel, he wanders into a storage shed on the beach and lights a match to get his bearings. The shed happens to be packed with fireworks, and as the various fireworks explode in the otherwise soundless night, they fizz, crackle, boom, whiz, and squeal. They shoot into the air, burst in spectacular patterns, cascade through the night sky, whirl in circles, and bombard the hotel, wakening the entire hotel and throwing it into a panic.
The next day is the end of the vacation, and the holiday-makers gather in front of the hotel to say good-bye to one another—exchanging addresses, promising to keep in touch, expressing hopes of seeing one another next year. But for M. Hulot there are no fond farewells, for the fiasco of the night before has been the last straw, and he is pointedly excluded from the fulsome camaraderie. Shunned, he makes his way to the beach and sits with the children, with whom his temperament has more in common than with their uptight parents. Two people, however, do make a point of saying good-bye to him: the Englishwoman who has never really been part of the group and the henpecked little man who has been strolling with his wife the entire time. M. Hulot's friends are dogs, children, and the other pariahs of the group. At the end of the movie, the beach concessions are being boarded up, the beach is once again deserted, and M. Hulot drives away alone in his little car, the last to leave. We don't know where he came from, and it will be five years, until Tati's next movie, Mon Oncle (1958), before we learn where he is returning to.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Penelope Cruz Professional Photo Session for Mango Spring/Summer 2009
Penelope Cruz looks amazing and beautiful in her Mango Spring/Summer Campaign 2009 photo shoot, photographed by Mert and Marcus. The Mango Spring / Summer 2009 collection allows you to have your pick of several little black dresses and dainty, ruffled tops, coupled with more tailored, menswear-inspired pieces like trenches.
Penelope Cruz with her big brown eyes is just the perfect to show off such classy, timeless pieces as these. The limited collection of the star for the Spring / Summer ’09 Mango line is centered on “Japanese influenced, kimono styles and blazer-trouser combos,” as several media outlets report. However, the “piece de resistance” is the all too important little black dress, as the new
shots for the fourth Cruz campaign also show.









